• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

AMD 955 Sells Out.

Final8y

Final8y

Final8y

Soldato
Joined
7 May 2006
Posts
12,183
Location
London, Ealing
A few people have been tracking the sales of AMD current Desktop FlagShip CPU.
In one particular case one of the Biggest USA E-tailers has sold out 4 times in the last month.
 
Final8y said:
A few people have been tracking the sales of AMD current Desktop FlagShip CPU.
In one particular case one of the Biggest USA E-tailers has sold out 4 times in the last month.
Click to expand...
Maybe AMD are just going to just replace the 955 with the 965 as the current Black Edition CPU for purchase, then maybe release a multi-locked version of the 955 for a lot cheaper.

They used to do this with the FX series years ago i.e. FX53, FX55, FX57 in terms of FX53 = AMD 4000 cpu etc etc.
 
Last edited:
I don't think they will, well i hope they don't.
I can see a possibility of the lowest of the family dropping off the bottom to make way.
But we will see.
 
Last edited:
Final8y said:
I don't think they will, well i hope they don't.
I can see a possibility of the lowest of the family dropping off the bottom to make way.
But we will see.
Click to expand...

What, the 810? I thought the reason they're still making it is because it has a low TDP, so it's perfect for HTPCs and the like. But they do have a few 'e' models out now, so you might be right.
 
WoW... I remember those AMD FX series... they used to be the top of the chain in terms of CPU.. was really expensive and I couldn't afford them. In terms of pricing they have changed a lot now.
 
PakJai said:
WoW... I remember those AMD FX series... they used to be the top of the chain in terms of CPU.. was really expensive and I couldn't afford them. In terms of pricing they have changed a lot now.
Click to expand...

Well, according to a thread here on the forum, Check the thread below, AMD are considering bringing out FX Phenom II processors if AMD users want them enough but they will be expensive.

Thread:

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18038958
 
Last edited:
No reason for an FX now i think. Even at 4GHz i doubt that it would outperform an i7 at 3.2GHz. Sometimes i guess but intel can release a higher end model anytime they want.
 
not the right time for an FX, AMD need to challenge Intel some more before they try and take on the big guns in this moment in time the i7 extremes.

Right now there gaining some popularity with gamers with the 955, which is a huge step considering the c2d and c2q pretty much ran them off the road map.
 
People need to get it out of their heads that AMD are in a continuous battle with Intel. They're both manufacturers of the same item, yes, but both have said that they are not in direct competition and they get along well. Not like Microsoft and Apple *shivers as he remembers Apple's add campaign*. Besides, if one owned all the market then there would be no need to make better products or have lower prices. Intel would do what they did before AMD came along and make cheap products and charge whatever they liked, because there's nobody else to get them from. And they would get done by somebody (probably the EU) for owning 100% of a market.
 
if they werent in competition then amd would be happy with a miniscule market share.....doubt that :p whatever they say of course they are lol

http://www.amd.com/uk/products/server/opteron/Pages/opteron-for-server.aspx

AMD Opteron Processors for Servers
Offering Industry-Leading Performance-Per-Watt and Superior Virtualization capabilities
Click to expand...
Six-Core AMD Opteron™ Processor
A balance of performance, energy efficiency and lower ownership costs

Six-Core AMD Opteron™ processor-based servers deliver performance efficiency to handle real world workloads—with superior value and energy efficiency at every price point. Unlike competitive products focused on raw performance, AMD technology-based servers deliver one platform to support the top-line demands of your business with a total cost advantage you can take right to the bottom-line.
Click to expand...


industry leading? superior? unlike the competition?....dont be naive;)
 
Last edited:
AMD don't have a minuscule market share... just a smaller one than Intel. And yes, they are happy. But the thing is neither actively try to take market share from the other.
 
just read their adverts. like i said, dont be naive lol. from the moment you mention competitive products, you are in competition. It's that simple :p

Phenomenal performance with advanced processor design.

The AMD Phenom™ processors are the most advanced processors for true multitasking with true quad-core design. Don’t get bogged down by non-native quad-core processors and obsolete front side bus architectures. With an integrated memory controller and shared L3 cache, AMD Phenom™ processors have low-latency access to main memory for amazingly rapid system response and phenomenal system performance.
Click to expand...

thats not a direct reference to intel, is it? :p
 
Last edited:
james.miller said:
just read their adverts. like i said, dont be naive lol. from the moment you mention competitive products, you are in competition. It's that simple :p



thats not a direct reference to intel, is it? :p
Click to expand...

Can't be, i7 is native quad core, doesn't use an outdated fsb design and has both onboard memory controllers and l3 cache. :p

(apples to apples :p )
 
question is what will the i5's do to AMD's bang for buck tri and dual core phenom IIs if that isn't bringing competition to ones once comfortable doorstep, what is?

this competition will infact be good to the consumer as prices will keep falling.
 
yes and also keep the market on its toes as AMD will most likey counter it they have to
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom